Macomb County Medical Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381796566
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Lexington, MI, USA
Phone
8772646592
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$60,206
Expenses
$47,991
Assets
$312,882
Liabilities
$21,744

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NARENDRA GOHEL MD (PRESIDENT)
  • LAWRENCE HANDLER MD (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • HEIDI LEACH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • DANIEL M RYAN MD (TREASURER)
  • NARENDRA GOHEL MD (PRESIDENT)
  • LAWRENCE HANDLER MD (PRESIDENT-ELECT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To bring into one viable, effective organization the physicians practicing in macomb county in order to promote and preserve the health of the citizens of macomb county, mi.

What it reported doing in 2025

Production of macomb medicus journal. A quarterly print and digital publication for members, covering current relevant professional topics.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.8%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 47%; rating input score 47

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.3%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.52; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 65%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44.8% of revenue deployed · 47% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $23K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.